By NOELLE NICOLLS

Tribune Features Editor

nnicolls@tribunemedia.net

LOVE him or hate him as you choose, but accept, Branville McCartney, leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) and candidate for Bamboo Town, is no political lightweight.

He finally convinced me of that with his performance in the theatre at last week's first mass rally for the DNA.

As far as political strategy goes, getting the political theatre right, is as much, if not entirely more important than even substance, because it is the political theatre that appeals to public perception, which in politics is more important than "the best man" or even the truth.

So I must hand it to Mr McCartney, who gave a rousing political speech last week at the first DNA mass rally. Of course it had a lot of rabble rousing, as well as empty, even outlandish promises, but it also had a lot of personality and political savvy.

Contrary to the intellectual view, a small percent of a speech's effectiveness depends on content. A political speech is made great more so by the emotional connection in which the speaker engenders with the audience; essentially, inspiring people with passion, not to be mistaken for talking loudly. A politician does so with self-confidence, sounding intelligent, a sense of humour, a show of strength, emotion, and passion.

Mr McCartney possesses all of these strengths, and he knows how to wield them with great effect to influence the people, who should now be considered the DNA's base.

Mr McCartney's task is to inspire his base to believe in the process and to believe in their own power. With this, he keeps his political lifeline alive and the DNA in the game. As far as political speeches go, his performance at the first mass rally was impressive, even by my standards.

Mr McCartney's strongest arguments were not about his own strengths or the party's ideas. Quite frankly, aside from promoting fixed boundaries ("except for exceptional circumstances", whatever that means), and pledging to carry out capital punishment, and a few points on immigration, his speech by way of ideas was fluffy and generic.

He said: "(The DNA) will establish a national Intelligence Consortium and Agency that develops policies and procedures geared towards oversight of intelligent systems that will allow our DNA government to make effective policy decisions." This sounds like a stereotypical PLP pronouncement. The DNA proposes not just a consortium, but also an agency, to develop oversight policies that will help the government make effective decisions.

Say what?

The DNA also proposed as crime fighting strategies, efforts to "better coordinate efforts between government agencies, vastly improve the cohesion of our security network, and use intelligent data gathered from (its) improved network to better fight crime."

On the economic front, Mr DNA pledged to create an "economic environment to facilitate employment, to create the business environment to facilitate entrepreneurship, innovation and local ownership, and to improve the cost of living," in addition to reducing the price of fuel. The only thing he left off his list was world peace.

Like I said, his ideas were not his strongest asset. What Mr McCartney did to great effect was speak to the weakness of the field, preying on those Bahamians, who are tired of Christie and Ingraham, or as Mr McCartney put it, "Hubert Christie and Perry Ingraham."

"Bahamians don't feel safe anymore and this is because of the collective failures of Christie and Ingraham," said Mr McCartney. It is true, Bahamians don't feel safe anymore, and even though it is dishonest to blame the government for the "crime problem", Bahamians believe the lie, because it absolves them of their own complicity and responsibility.

He told his supports to "follow the light to safe harbour" and cast a vote for the lighthouse if they were tired of the "collective failures of Christie and Ingraham."

In truth, many if not most Bahamians, are tired of the collective failures of Christie and Ingraham, who have held the reins of power for some two decades. But just as Mr McCartney has inspired his base to believe, in spite of the odds, Mr Christie and Mr Ingraham have inspired their bases to believe, in spite of the failures.

Nonetheless, Mr McCartney had some biting things to say. Last week he used his incisors. He brought up the Greenberg Report, which was commissioned by the PLP after its 2007 defeat to shed light on the reasons for the loss.

The report pointed to "weak and indecisive leadership by Perry Christie" as one of the reasons. It is the same charge Mr Christie is being hammered by in this election cycle.

"The country already rejected (Mr Christie) as a leader in 2007. What has Christie done between 2007 and 2012 to now make him worthy of another chance? The only thing he has done was apologise and to say if you make me your prime minister again, I will do better. It's time to pack up, Mr Christie. Time to go home. The people rejected you then and they will reject you again in 2012," said Mr McCartney, last week.

He drew a contrast between the DNA's history making feats, and the PLP's history making feats, under Mr Christie's leadership. "(The PLP) were voted out only after one term, making history as the only one term government in the history of the Bahamas," said Mr McCartney, who also accused Mr Christie of being a weak leader of the opposition.

Mr McCartney jeered at the PLP for its late release of a manifesto, claiming that having been a member of parliament for 35 years, Mr Christie had ample time to produce an early manifesto. (The PLP has claimed that its "new ideas" have been in circulation for months, which is true, as per Project Safe Bahamas and Urban Renewal 2.0. Their critics claim these efforts still do not add up to a manifesto, a customary electioneering document).

As if this ammunition was not enough, Mr McCartney sought to undermine the PLP's boasting about being a bridge to the future.

"Christie has the same core of people that disobeyed his orders last time and they have all been nominated to run again...This is the same old PLP.

"Don't let Christie try to fool you. Christie couldn't control them then and he certainly can't control them now. A vote for Christie is a vote for chaos," said Mr McCartney, preying on the fears of some Bahamians.

As far as ire for the FNM is concerned, Mr McCartney had enough to go around. He mocked Mr Ingraham for calling the DNA a "splinter group."

"But, oh, look at us tonight. Tell him look now. Look Ingraham look. He has no respect for Bahamians," said Mr McCartney.

He criticized Mr Ingraham for issuing "over 30,000 work permits in an economic recession", when unemployment is at an all time high. "One in 3 Bahamians between the ages of 18 and 25 don't have a job," said Mr McCartney.

Of the FNM's proposal to create a Consumer Protection Agency, Mr McCartney said it was a "crying shame and a national disgrace" for Mr Ingraham, having jammed Coconut Grove business owners, to fix his mouth and say, he wants to protect consumers. "Stop talking fool man," said Mr McCartney, referring to the prime minister. "It's time to go," he said.

"Why didn't you protect the hundreds of Bahamian businessmen who had to close their businesses down as a result of your decision to close down most of the major roads in New Providence at one time?"

On the FNM's "we deliver" message, Mr McCartney adopted the same strategy as the PLP, in pointing to the failures delivered by the FNM, including "slack and unenforced immigration laws."

"Ingraham delivered 8000 homes whose water was disconnected by the Water and Sewerage Corporation. Ingraham delivered 5000 homes without electricity connections. Ingraham delivered more Bahamian families to Social Services for support than any time in our history," said Mr McCartney.

On balance, I think Mr McCartney's arguments are more damaging to the PLP. They were more personal and they feed into a more damaging stereotype that has dogged the PLP, particularly Mr Christie.

For the sake of Mr Christie's reputation, the PLP are in a must win situation. The Bahamas has only had three prime ministers in its history, and I do not think either of the living ones should be the judge about who was the best, as they are now out on the campaign trail doing. But I think it is safe to say, if the PLP loses, Mr Christie's argument will be shot to hell.

For the DNA's part, Mr McCartney is spreading one message that rings true:

"When you know better, you have an obligation to yourself to do better." It was a consistent theme in his presentation. In an almost bravado challenge, Mr McCartney asked, who has the "courage to vote for better" on election day.

"My fellow Bahamians, it is time for a change. Do you know better? Are you ready to do better? Vote DNA," said Mr McCartney. "Tell mummy and daddy that you appreciate their views and struggles, but that it's time for a Bran(d) new day."

Mr McCartney told the people that this election would show them that the power of the people is more important than the people in power. The power in the message was Mr McCartney's ability to get his supporters to believe. That is important, because his strength as an orator has enabled the DNA to build, bit by bit, a base, no matter how small it may be.

The Bahamian people have not dismissed Mr McCartney, and by and large he has convinced the mainstream media that the DNA is not just some fringe party, but a serious contender, worthy of equal consideration for placement next to the FNM and PLP.

No other third party has been granted such consideration. No other party has been able to rob the FNM or PLP of airtime and newspaper real estate.

The only people who have not acknowledged the DNA are the leaders of his competing parties. But with or without their approval, the DNA is making their voice be heard.

In my books, Mr McCartney is still "blacklisted" on spousal rape (and a host of other important issues), but for what it's worth, I think the DNA has made a brilliantly audacious showing, not just as a third party, but as a political party.

This is precisely why I can say with confidence and authority that in a DNA government the people will be disillusioned all the same. The party means well, but it exists inside a system, of which it is also a slave. The Rastafari tell us all the time that such a system exists. Mutabaruka has been an important voice in saying so, that "the system, the system, the system is a fraud."

Look at US President Barak Obama. I am not calling him a fraud, but I am saying that everyone who drank his change koolaid was a bit naive. He exists in a system, a powerful one at that. And not even he has the power to bring the change he desires. The presidency is a political institution and like it or not, Mr Obama has to bow to its order. The United State itself is an institution, and like it or not, for example, Mr Obama has no power, without breaking the back of the institution, of changing its relationship with Israel or Cuba, no matter how disdainful the US foreign policy position may be. Yes, he has brought some change. But yes, he has brought a lot of the same.

No man, no government, especially not in five years, has the power to do some of things Mr McCartney is claiming to be able to do. He promised the people last week that under the DNA the ills would change, including "social decay, record murders, record unemployment" that are permeating Bahamian society. "You have my promise on that Bahamas," said Mr McCartney.

And yet, in the same speech, while speaking about his opponents, he said, "promises are a comfort to a fool." I would caution Bahamians to believe the latter comment.

For the past 39 years in an independent Bahamas, violent crime has been on the rise. Not because of the government. We live in an increasingly materialistic, capitalistic society that breeds indiscipline, discontent and violence, to begin with. The Bahamas is in need of fundamental change, but the important changes are systemic, and you need more than change talk to change that. Change talk is cheap when it comes to problems that are far greater than the government, or even the Bahamas as a nation.

The DNA simply does not have the power to live up to many of its promises, and I promise you that. Even more than new ideas, we need a new model, for the Bahamas and the world, and the DNA is not bringing that. Neither is the FNM or PLP, which is why the Bahamas is bracing for another five years of chugging along, regardless of who gets in power.

On the most basic level, still, I will give it to the DNA for putting on a good show at the theatre. I think the crowd was large enough, and the production quality good enough to legitimately qualify as a mass rally, which in itself is impressive for a party that was expected to be dead on arrival. People laughed when Mr McCartney said he would field 38 candidates, and yet he has, regardless of how laughable some of them may be.

But the same can be said for the FNM and PLP, who also have laughable and objectionable candidates. Added to that the DNA has a lot of unknowns, but on the other hand, they have a handful of credible candidates: Randy Butler for North Andros and the Berry Islands, Mark Humes for Fort Charlotte, Chris Mortimer for Nassau Village, Charlene Paul for Elizabeth, even Roscoe Thompson in Central and South Abaco, to name a few.

I do not know all of these candidates personally, but I do know that although some of them are polarising, they were respected men and women in the community before their foray into politics. Some of them were even respected inside the political parties that held their former allegiance. And I think it is disingenuous to rob them of their respect now that they are in politics, no matter how unfortunate you think it is that they joined the DNA.

No political party in the Bahamas has a clean slate. And for at least a handful of DNA candidates, though they may be green in politics, they were/are respected and credible leaders in their respective spheres of influence. At some level you have to appreciate their courage.

Unfortunately for the DNA, this does not prove they represent any real change, only that they present another option. But I suppose that is worth their credit because for the first time, by all appearances, Bahamians accept that another party exists, in sufficient numbers to compete on the political stage with the FNM and PLP. I for one cannot wait to see how all of this translates at the polls.

Personally, I still don't believe Mr McCartney's seat is secure, but I am starting believe one or two DNA candidates will at least get their money back.

On nomination day, Mr McCartney noted how much the DNA has been able to accomplish in 11 months, claiming that as an indication of what would be possible with five years. I actually think there is a reasonable argument in there. If the DNA is committed, well funded, and has a few epiphanies, I think they could really shake up things in another 10 to 15 years.

The DNA has given some Bahamians new hope, no matter how false it may turn out to be. That is good for Bahamian democracy.

Join the conversation on Tribune242.com and follow Noelle online at Twitter.com/noelle_elleon.